I guess the TW is trying to go out of business. Two years ago I got 52 weeks of 7 day delivery for $275. I thought I got the same last year but they seem to have cut me short by a month. Now it is official policy and they want $348.40 for "52 weeks"

Quote

Your new expiration date will be based on current pricing and is subject to change with future price adjustments. Your subscription includes delivery of the paper on Thanksgiving day and 6 editions of Tulsa World Magazine. Your account will be charged a premium for these editions, thereby shortening your renewal term and changing your subscription expiration date. Tulsa World will charge a $5.00 processing fee for refunds remitted to the customer. Tulsa World subscription will continue unless notified by subscriber to stop.

Bold type is in the notice, not added by me. I guess I will let my subscription expire without renewal. I hope I don't have as much trouble ending my subscription with the TW as I did with Cox Cable.

I guess the TW is trying to go out of business. Two years ago I got 52 weeks of 7 day delivery for $275. I thought I got the same last year but they seem to have cut me short by a month. Now it is official policy and they want $348.40 for "52 weeks"

Bold type is in the notice, not added by me. I guess I will let my subscription expire without renewal. I hope I don't have as much trouble ending my subscription with the TW as I did with Cox Cable.

Got rid of mine because of that increase. And do not miss it one bit. But be ready for lots of calls and "morning reads" in your email.

I guess the TW is trying to go out of business. Two years ago I got 52 weeks of 7 day delivery for $275. I thought I got the same last year but they seem to have cut me short by a month. Now it is official policy and they want $348.40 for "52 weeks"

Bold type is in the notice, not added by me. I guess I will let my subscription expire without renewal. I hope I don't have as much trouble ending my subscription with the TW as I did with Cox Cable.

I had no problems killing my TV with Cox (I switched to DirecTV last month). But upfront I told them not to harass me about it either. I knew the deal I was getting with Direct was not going be be matched at all.

Last time we had print TW was when Mom was still alive. We dropped them and I showed her how to read it online. About six months later she got a cold call for a renewal; she wanted to do weekends and Sundays but they tricked her into a deal that actually cost more than what she paid for daily service. When I found out about it I called them back and told them to take her off their call list and revoke the charges. It wasn't a pleasant call for them as I went directly to the supervisor for that one.

Logged

Libertarianism is a system of beliefs for people who think adolescence is the epitome of human achievement.

Global warming isn't real because it was cold today. Also great news: world famine is over because I just ate - Stephen Colbert.

I had no problems killing my TV with Cox (I switched to DirecTV last month).

I got rid of them just before they started charging for the "box". A Cox person called on the phone to remind me that I needed to upgrade. I told that person to cancel the subscription. Then Cox tried to charge me for a couple of weeks, claiming I had not quit them. I finally had to write to the City of Bixby as they are the franchise director (or something). I still get stuff in the US Mail offering something I tear in half without even opening it.

Quote

Last time we had print TW was when Mom was still alive.

We've had it at this house since we moved here in 1971. Dad died long ago. Mom died two years ago. I just kept the subscription going, still in dad's name.

I too am considering dropping it. Since they changed their online/mobile format I only read it on paper...and that might be once a week. The new mobile format shoves content in your face, look at this or that popular or primed article. It is nearly impossible to browse the paper unless you click the e-edition (which I don't like on my phone) or click through individual sections, which is a pain.

Maybe I'm too picky, but I enjoy browsing the headlines and then clicking the articles I found interesting. That's basically how I read the paper edition. If I want "the most popular' content i can just follow the facebook page.

I too am considering dropping it. Since they changed their online/mobile format I only read it on paper...and that might be once a week. The new mobile format shoves content in your face, look at this or that popular or primed article. It is nearly impossible to browse the paper unless you click the e-edition (which I don't like on my phone) or click through individual sections, which is a pain.

Maybe I'm too picky, but I enjoy browsing the headlines and then clicking the articles I found interesting. That's basically how I read the paper edition. If I want "the most popular' content i can just follow the facebook page.

Couple that with a price increase...

Who designed their new website? It is awful. There was nothing wrong with the prior format. Now it is a chore to find an article and I usually just end up giving up.

Paper size has been reduced and content is strongly anti-Trump. Thought a newspaper is traditionally non-bias. Oh very interesting way of delivering the news. they have a fewer number of stories but have increased the length of the stories they print. That way less employers required.

If were not for my wife we would not take the rag. A mere shadow of what it once was.

Case in point - I saw a headline on Facebook from the TW about a new proposed development at 71st and Memorial. I thought that would make an interesting topic of conversation for this forum, so I go to the TW website and try to find it and could not in a basic look around. I then went to search, the first item under a search for "development" is new developments in the OJ Simpson Trial from 1994. Then an article about BA's new development department in 2005. The first page had nothing from 2015, 2016, or 2017.

I refined my search by date and description and found the article from Friday, but don't you think a newspaper search should be bias in favor of more recent articles? Just frustrated by the new format.

I disagree with Citizen72 on the Trump aspect though. Other than the Bruce Plante, who does draw criticism for that, (and, really, isn't being controversial part of his job?) I don't see an inherent bias for or against the President.

I disagree with Citizen72 on the Trump aspect though. Other than the Bruce Plante, who does draw criticism for that, (and, really, isn't being controversial part of his job?) I don't see an inherent bias for or against the President.

Anything less than praise is anti-trump.

One big advantage media like the Whirled and The Frontier have is their reporting isnt dependent on sound bites. Broadcasters are routinely manipulated by news sources withholding sound in attempts to influence or kill a story. Print media manage to do a better job of reporting without.

I dislike the current trend of excerpting a couple of paragraphs and then teasing the rest of the story to another publication's paywall.

Logged

"Tulsa will lay off police and firemen before we will cut back on unnecessarily wasteful streetlights." -- March 18, 2009 TulsaNow Forum

I disagree with Citizen72 on the Trump aspect though. Other than the Bruce Plante, who does draw criticism for that, (and, really, isn't being controversial part of his job?) I don't see an inherent bias for or against the President.

Interesting that you would say that. Guess we do not read the same paper. Guess also you are not aware that the TW is an acknowledged Democrats rag. Please believe me I am not castigating democrats. Neither do I feel compelled to follow a strict party line. My parents thought me that there is good and bad in everyone.

Interesting that you would say that. Guess we do not read the same paper. Guess also you are not aware that the TW is an acknowledged Democrats rag.

I have no idea where you would get that. The Tulsa World has not endorsed a democrat for President for the last seven elections. They endorsed every republican running for Oklahoma congressional seats and have for the last six election cycles. The stories about Mark Wayne Mullin last year bordered on fandom.

I think citizen72 must be reading between the lines. The Tulsa World is more conservative and partisan than Tulsa is in general and that is hard to be and still be objective.

Quote from: citizen72 on December 25, 2017, 04:07:43 pmInteresting that you would say that. Guess we do not read the same paper. Guess also you are not aware that the TW is an acknowledged Democrats rag.

I have no idea where you would get that.

I haven't seen a TW since early October. They usually had some liberal columnists from other sources in the editorial pages though.

Mission

&nbsp

"TulsaNow's Mission is to help Tulsa
become the most vibrant, diverse,
sustainable and prosperous city of
our size. We achieve this by focusing
on the development of Tulsa's
distinctive identity and economic
growth around a dynamic, urban
core, complemented by a constellation
of livable, thriving communities." more...